Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Latest Polls Show Democrats in Dead Heat in Iowa

Christmas has come and gone, but the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire appear to be telling the same story.

Similar to polls released last week, the latest Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll shows the Democratic contest between Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Senator Barack Obama of Illinois to be neck-and-neck in New Hampshire, but in Iowa they are in a locked into a three-way tie with former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina.

Mr. Obama is supported by 32 percent of Democratic primary voters in New Hampshire, while Mrs. Clinton is the choice of 30 percent. In Iowa, Mrs. Clinton is preferred by 29 percent, Mr. Obama by 26 percent and 25 percent for Mr. Edwards. In both polls, the differences were within the margin of sampling error.
On the Republican side, the L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll shows Mike Huckabee with 37 percent in Iowa, compared with 23 percent for Mitt Romney, a lead beyond the poll’s margin of sampling error. In New Hampshire, though, Mr. Huckabee is backed by 9 percent, compared with 34 percent who support Mr. Romney and 21 percent for John McCain.

The telephone polls were conducted Dec. 20-23 and Dec. 26 with 2,145 registered voters in Iowa and 1,279 voters in New Hampshire. The margin of sampling error among Democratic primary and caucus voters in both states was plus or minus 4 percentage points; for Republican caucus voters in Iowa it was 6 points; for Republican voters in New Hampshire it was 5 points. More information is available at www.latimes.com.

Support John Edwards. This is the only Democratic candidate that can win the General Election. To win, a candidate MUST get the southern vote and the swing voters. Edwards can do this; not Hillary, not Barack. Support a winner, support Edwards.

Hope is only a word if you don’t have a candidate experienced enough to implement it. Support Clinton, Dodd, or Biden–anyone but Obama. Fired up? Ready to go? Please do. Go away and don’t ruin our chance at winning in the general. Support a real viable candidate and not an EMPTY phrase that your candidate cannot back up.

Nothing against Edwards. I like him, and I like his wife even more. But he did not win last time, and there is no indication he could do better this time around. Especially since he does not have enough money.
Hillary? She was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq. The war in Iraq is destabilizing the situation in the middle east. Still want to vote for her?

John Edwards is a good man but polls indicate that Obama leads with young voters… Independents and disenchanted Republicans.
Your candidate is further behind in New Hampshire
and South Carolina.
Support a winner….support OBAMA !!!

Thanks for the responsible reporting of this poll. It’s unfortunate and derelict when news outlets use percentage differences within the margin of error, sometimes as slim as a single point, to state that someone is “ahead” or “trailing.” Iowa remains difficult to call. [Even the predictive markets aren’t able to settle on the forthcoming winner of these early contests.] It will be interesting to see how things unfold in these final days…

the 2 first comments on this page are typical of spineless democrats. the most failed presidential administration in recent memory and the dems are still worried that they can’t win an election. “vote for hillary…she’s practically a republican…she can win!” “dont vote for obama, he’s not southern or white!”

please…if the dems can’t nominate a decent candidate and win against THIS republican field, can we just eliminate the democratic party already?

#7
I don’t take my cues from Mitt Romney and if you do, I don’t take my cues from you either. Mitt will likely flip flop and say experience trumps judgment tomorrow and Obama will probably say that he would have said the same thing if he had been in office, or present to vote, or had the courage to vote yes or no on any issue, if he wasn’t abroad during his infancy.

As has been noted by many, polls often overestimate the voting support of black candidates, because voters are swayed by racist prejudice more often than they are willing to admit to pollsters.

But the polls may also (for reasons that are more benign) underestimate the support for Edwards because (1) voters may sympathize with his anti-corporatist message more than they might be willing to admit, and (2) people normally overestimate how likely they are to attend a caucus (or do other things) and Edwards has focused his campaign on previous caucus attendees (who are more likely to be true to their intentions) more than the other candidates.

The point has been made that Obama has more support among independents, I believe that had Edwards been given all the attention by the media that Barack recieved, the Independents would realize that he really is a moderate democrat. As for Obamas support of young voters, historically, young voters don’t turn out, I think Edward’s viability in southern states is of more importance. And honestly, Hilary? She can never and will never win. I don’t think she’s a bad person at all, but because of her relationship with her husband she comes off as a person willing to do anything for political gain or a weak-willed person, unable to stand under pressure. That being said, as much as i hope, i don’t foresee Edwards winning the nomination.

Edwards’ message resonates with anyone who has seen their livelihood threatened and their chances at success curtailed by a system which favors the very rich and those connected to the conservative power structure.

Don’t for a minute think that those who wield the reins of power will welcome you to the table and give you a vote on the policies which affect your life.

Edwards knows this and he has made it his crusade to take a stand for our chances, we need to support his efforts and our chances.

Anyone but Obama! Republicans do not support Obama. It’s all a farce. I can only imagine the faces of all the hillary haters. The few men that are still around that are intimidated by women. Strong women. Then there are probably the submissive woman. Who honestly believes that man was placed on earth of protect you? Then there are the feminists (hard-core) who probably will never understand who this woman actually is. “I am woman hear me roar.” When I see Clinton I see a part of a history that we will be damn proud we made happen.

Support a self made person.
– as you would support the same in your own community.
Say No to Nepotism.
– as you would say No to Nepotism in your own community.
Say No to triangulated Iraq War green-light votes.
– as you have said no to Bush’s botched war in your own community.

Say yes to a new brighter vision for America.
It’s time to Rise and Shine again.

JOHN EDWARDS will win BIG in Iowa and go on to be President of the United States, because he is the ONLY candidate who represents the middle class in America, and not the mega-corporations, BIG OIL, the insurance industry, and the like.

The morally bankrupt Republican Party and their allies in the mass media would LOVE to see Clinton or Obama get the Democratic nomination, because they know they can beat both Clinton or Obama in the general election, but would have NO chance whatsoever against Edwards. If the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate Clinton or Obama, they desreve to lose!

#14 you say Edwards has viability in southern states? This only proves how much you don’t know. Edwards only won one southern state in the 2004 primary (SC) and barely and couldn’t help Kerry carry a single southern state during the general, including his home state of NC. He would have lost had he run for reelection.

Edwards was unimpressive the first time and despite becoming the “fighter” this term he is still unimpressive. And let’s not forget that he has accepted public financing and has no money to compete. Even if he wins Iowa, it’s over for him.

I’m shocked to see the comments supporting Edwards as “the candidate that can win.”

The man has been campaigning in Iowa for 4 years and isn’t in the lead – does that perhaps spell trouble? On top of it, his voting record in the senate is terrible – for example, supporting bankruptcy legislation that crippled the very “poor folks” he claims to care so much about not to mention his vote in favor of the Iraq war.

But more important, he’s simply not the right candidate for the issues we face today nationally and internationally. Obama brings a powerful personal experience and identity to the dialogue. His name, his face, his personal struggle to determine his identity as neither black nor white – as well as his refusal to accept money or cowtow to lobbies – all speak powerfully to our time.

He is uniquely prepared to address the issues of race, religion, immigration and corporate greed and corruption that face our country and our world. I urge you to think about it from this perspective. Read the December issue of The Atlantic – with a fascinating article on this very topic (and why his is uniquely electable and appealing to so many).

If we are no longer capable of hoping for a better future, where exactly does that leave us?

That Edwards is in a dead heat with Hilary and Barack is a testament to his strength and potential as a candidate, considering that the media has given him perhaps 5% or 10% of the coverage given the other two.

Who can’t love Elizabeth? I wouldn’t mind a co-presidency with the two of them.

It’s painful to write this, but we simply can’t risk nominating someone who could lose because of old prejudices that may still exist. That’s incredibly unfair, but if we want to win and help stop the rapid degradation of this society, we can’t ignore the electability question.

I think people are over-estimating the importance of the southern states. The electorate is changing and the west is becoming more and more important. Also, remember that Bush only won both elections by a razor thin margin. One southern or western state going Democrat could make a big difference. Figure in Ohio that could be won by picking Ted Strickland who is a popular governor as a running mate and the south loses some of its importance.

President Obama drew criticism on Thursday when he said, “we don’t have a strategy yet,” for military action against ISIS in Syria. Lawmakers will weigh in on Mr. Obama’s comments on the Sunday shows.Read more…